Dispute at Pillings

[Naughty Cal]

I am intrigued how the organisation (ie the multitude of incestuous companys which were/are PL management) can now find the money to pay a years fees up front when only a few months ago, they couldn't afford to pay.

Have they won the pools :-).

 

haggis

They have been under the mattress.

[Phantasm]

You think £50k is a small sum? CRT have received this for doing nothing. It's additional revenue for them from a business working hard.

We have higher occupancy levels than in previous years and have negotiated and agreement that is satisfactory. We will be paying a year up front. We are moving forward with CRT regardless of arguments raised in this thread - and the berth holders will continue to enjoy living in the lovely community they have developed at PLM.

G will be closed off, not removed. We can apply at a later date to have it reopened.

Can you tell me exactly what CRT should have been doing to invest in your business. I thought their business was the waterways, to which you want access and agreed to pay for the service and then didn't, not building and administering private marinas, which is your business. Don't see where they should have been putting money into your venture.

[MtB]

You think £50k is a small sum? CRT have received this for doing nothing.

 

Bloody hell.

 

In response, I'll point out that charging boaters £2k a year for tying their boat to one of your pontoons is also money for doing nothing. Why should they pay you a penny for that?

 

Think carefully about your answer...

 

 

MtB

[Naughty Cal]

Can you tell me exactly what CRT should have been doing to invest in your business. I thought their business was the waterways, to which you want access and agreed to pay for the service and then didn't, not building and administering private marinas, which is your business. Don't see where they should have been putting money into your venture.

In a round a bout way CRT are proving them a service.

 

No canal, no marina.

 

As they will find out on Monday no doubt!

[dor]

As you can imagine we have had more pressing things occupying our time.

FYI we paid close to £50k. Regardless of your views, a fledging business having to pay 9% of their full occupancy during a recession when they have invested £4 million and CRT NOTHING, needs addressing. Phil Spencer cannot even explain how he reached the figure of 9%.

 

 

But they only had to pay 50% in the second year (the first year being free), so hardly a "fledgling business" in their third year. Perhaps the question should be "how does a fledgling business afford to pay its MD so much in money and kind in its first couple of years?"

[Dangerous Dave]

So CSH is part of PLM then,constantly referring to us and we. Theres another salary drawn i imagine too. From a company that cannot pay its bills

 

 

Its school holiday time..He is attending the caff and back office out of love!

[Swallowman]

But to the topic.

 

The new NAA will be signed as soon as possible. The meeting between RR and PS ironed out some stipulations and both CRT's and our solicitors are working together to have it finalised.

 

So how come the marina can afford to pay it now with fewer vessels moored now than there were when it allegedly couldn't afford it?

 

Something smells and it's not just the water when the marina becomes a stagnant pond.

[Paul G2]

just thought we had better quote this before he goes back and changes it......

I think that, if PL changes the original quote, the quote here will change too.

[Willber G]

I think that, if PL changes the original quote, the quote here will change too.

Quoted posts do not change if the original is subsequently edited.

[Ssscrudddy]

I'm in love with PL but I need to look like CSH in order to replace him

Quoted posts dont even need to match the original quote

[Willber G]

Quoted posts dont even need to match the original quote

Bad form.

[johnlillie]

From this post:

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=63317&page=75#entry1224949

 

"maybe we were naïve, but the costs of the NAA were not in the original business plan!"

just to clarify, when the original business plan was drawn up, we had not bought the site, or even spoken to anyone at BW, so did not know anything at all about NAA's, naïve I agree, but the NAA was I believe, signed by PL BEFORE we signed the deeds etc.

[Paul G2]

Quoted posts dont even need to match the original quote

 

This is in very bad taste, and, considering the contentiousness of this thread, quite inappropriate.

 

You can say anything you want about me, I can take a joke. But you should edit this out - give the mods a break.

[Ally]

So, I assume everyone who has commented on this thread has now had a slightly threatening pm from CSH? I received one, with solicitors and police apparently informed of the norty things I have written....

Erm.....

Hmmm......

Ok, I admit I did say pink and orange is not to my taste.

 

I am duly sitting on the norty step!

 

He also made some onerous comments about our business coming to an end and suggested we had no home mooring, which of course we do....but just not there! We chose another local marina for reasons I won't bother with.

Bless.

[Dangerous Dave]

 

This is in very bad taste, and, considering the contentiousness of this thread, quite inappropriate.

 

You can say anything you want about me, I can take a joke. But you should edit this out - give the mods a break.

 

 

I think the sudden appearance of A***** on here was to provoke such action ..As in causing the mods to get flack!

So, I assume everyone who has commented on this thread has now had a slightly threatening pm from CSH? I received one, with solicitors and police apparently informed of the norty things I have written....

Erm.....

Hmmm......

Ok, I admit I did say pink and orange is not to my taste.

 

I am duly sitting on the norty step!

 

He also made some onerous comments about our business coming to an end and suggested we had no home mooring, which of course we do....but just not there! We chose another local marina for reasons I won't bother with.

Bless.

 

 

Still the same PL...The dictators empire falling around him and he still tries to dictate the situation.

 

I'm so pleased that you found somewhere else!

[Swallowman]

So, I assume everyone who has commented on this thread has now had a slightly threatening pm from CSH? I received one, with solicitors and police apparently informed of the norty things I have written....

Erm.....

Hmmm......

Ok, I admit I did say pink and orange is not to my taste.

 

I am duly sitting on the norty step!

 

He also made some onerous comments about our business coming to an end and suggested we had no home mooring, which of course we do....but just not there! We chose another local marina for reasons I won't bother with.

Bless.

 

Do tell - were the comments libelous?

 

I think we all know why you had to close your business and all also sympathise greatly with the reasons.

[Robbo]

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/leatest/6810-still-threats-to-close-pillings

 

I think many of us here think that if there's no NAA and CRT don't stick to the timetable of blocking the marina that it will be a public relations disaster.

[Paul G2]

http://www.narrowboatworld.com/index.php/leatest/6810-still-threats-to-close-pillings

 

I think many of us here think that if there's no NAA and CRT don't stick to the timetable of blocking the marina that it will be a public relations disaster.

 

NBW is so far out of line with that article. Notice there is no by-line (author's name) on that blurb? It's probably a press release put out by PL that NBW just copied verbatim.

 

It's really hilarious how the PL propaganda piece published in NBW states that the director of the new company owning PLM "made it clear" that he will abide by the new NAA. How funny is that? It's like PL thinks that anything he says has an voracity with real people in the real world. If there was ever any doubt in anyone's mind, PL has made it quite clear by his comments here today that RR is, in fact, nothing more than his boy toy and that PL is clearly still in charge.

 

Regardless of whatever happens at PLM, the biggest PR disaster is just beginning to unfold as word gets out that PL, RR and PLM staff apparently think is alright to vandalize customers boats if there is a dispute over, well, just about anything it seems. The hypocrisy of PL's attitude toward debt notwithstanding, vandalizing someone's boat is stepping way over the line and, once word gets out about what has been done, all of those involved will surely be ostracized by the boating community.

 

Perhaps Mr. Steadman should take note of PL's alleged acts of criminal vandalism and use that as a reason to get the PL monkey off his back and get a professional in to manage the marina.

[SoosieQ]

Who owns PLT? Coz it sure as eggs is eggs is not RR. Is it wholly owned by QMH which is Steadman & Lillie?

[Ally]

Do tell - were the comments libelous?

 

I think we all know why you had to close your business and all also sympathise greatly with the reasons.

Sorry, no, it would not be right for me to go into detail. His comments weren't libelous, though he seems to think mine have been. He included another person in who my pm was addressed to, which was a little odd as I have no responsibility for any other persons words, actions or feelings of course.

It did feel like underhanded threats though, I guess he knows I have a soft centre! Not quite as soft as he believes.

[Willber G]

Sorry, no, it would not be right for me to go into detail. His comments weren't libelous, though he seems to think mine have been. He included another person in who my pm was addressed to, which was a little odd as I have no responsibility for any other persons words, actions or feelings of course.

It did feel like underhanded threats though, I guess he knows I have a soft centre! Not quite as soft as he believes.

It would be foolhardy in the extreme to make threats via a public messageboard even if using the PM facility.

[FadeToScarlet]

I would like to publicly notify members that, having received other information, I have edited my original post, which now reads as follows:

 

So at the moment, we're delivering a boat for a forum member, back to Cambridge.

This boat has come out of Pilling's Lock.

We went up last Saturday to test the engine and ensure it was ready to leave yesterday, on Tuesday- not last week.

The engine would not initially start. I found that the umbilical cable between the control panel and the engine had been unplugged, but kept together so nothing appeared wrong.

We started the engine, but noticed that the PRM gearbox was chucking out oil in an alarming fashion, and it turned out that the control arm for the gearbox had been removed, causing the leak. The nut, washer and stud were still in place, but the actuating arm was missing.

The forum member went to talk to Roy, as he owed some money. Roy initially said (paraphrasing) "oh no, we wouldn't do a thing like that, but we might chain up a boat that owed money as people have left before". However, he rang the workshop, and it transpired that they had removed the gearbox arm, without permission, and had it. However, they stated that they would not be able to fit it until sometime next week, perhaps Wednesday.

I was able to fit it, and replace the oil in the gearbox, and we successfully had a cruise around the marina, once the bill was settled.

I asked Roy when the control arm had been removed, and he stated that it had been taken a year ago when the boat first arrived- but at that time, the owner of the boat did not owe any money at all! This was incorrect. It troubles me that the director of the business, and the manager of the marina, was unable to give me a correct explanation for this, as he is in charge and responsible.

Edit to add: allegedly, access was gained by Pillings staff to this boat subsequently to this from the legal acquisition of a set of keys. Roy Rollings did not mention this. There was no external sign that any parts had been removed, nothing to say "engine inoperable, contact marina office". The first sign that something was wrong with the engine was when it started spurting oil from the gearbox all over the engine bay- which, fortunately, was noticed before damage was done.

Deliberately sabotaging this customer's boat, in a way that could have caused a great deal of damage had the oil leak not been spotted, seems in my opinion a very poor way to do business indeed. A simple handwritten note, with the engine covers left up to show that something had been removed, would have prevented this.

In my opinion, if Pillings Lock believed that they were acting correctly and lawfully, they should not have gone about this with secrecy, pretence and subterfuge, which risked damage to the engine, but instead should have made it clear that parts had been removed, and that the boat was not operable.

This is factually incorrect and Slander.

The vessel in question had a Tort Notice on it as there was a marina bill of over £1500 outstanding and the owner went AWOL - we even contacted the Police as we assumed he was dead!

The vessel had the drive linkage disabled at our request as we had to protect the vessel from any potential theft (keys were in the house where the owner lived and later missing) and also we had a Tort notice to recover our owed money which was considerable. Redwood Collections dealt with this matter formally.

The owner eventually re-appeared and paid his outstanding bill in instalments, but payments were never up to scratch.

The owner departed the Marina last week (still owing a few hundred quid) - there was still a Tort notice in place and had an unpaid bill. The owner actually couldn't pay the bill and therefore offered us a used Generator as payment which we accepted as it was better than nothing!!!

This person quoting this is damaging the reputations of the businesses involved and any post that refers to this matter incorrectly needs to be removed.

Thank you

Paul Lillie Director, Pilling's Lock Marina

pillingsbackoffice@btconnect.com

This post is factually incorrect.

 

The owner did not depart the marina last week. The boat was removed on Tuesday this week.

 

I know this because I removed it.

[FredDrift]

 

I think you may find as we speak (or type), he is offering CRT an old generator in settlement of the NAA debt...

 

 

MtB

Could be a good solution for the current crisis... An offer like that and PL will soon be ohm & dry, watt?

[GoodGurl]

i can't get my head around CRT's mentality on this, why would they agree to a new NAA with someone that don't own or have shares in PLM, surely the MARINA should be having the NAA with CRT not a subsidiary company or an outsider that has nothing to do with the marina, the only thing in common with PLM and PLTL and 750 Leicester Ltd is the marina address. Roy Rollings has nothing to do with the marina at all so why is he signing the NAA, i don't think CRT are right in the head over this.

[Bod]

i can't get my head around CRT's mentality on this, why would they agree to a new NAA with someone that don't own or have shares in PLM, surely the MARINA should be having the NAA with CRT not a subsidiary company or an outsider that has nothing to do with the marina, the only thing in common with PLM and PLTL and 750 Leicester Ltd is the marina address. Roy Rollings has nothing to do with the marina at all so why is he signing the NAA, i don't think CRT are right in the head over this.

Lets see what happens on Monday.

 

Bod